The question of the location of the mind came up at a Socrates Scribes meeting a while back but somehow we never came to a solid conclusion as to what or where the human mind was.
Is the mind the same thing as the brain? is some 'by product' of the brian? Why is that when we talk about the mind's eye we point to our heads?
When we talk about 'great minds' we are referring to intelligent that have provoked thought people. But isn't intelligence related to the brain? I don't believe the mind and the brain are one and the same but then where is the connection between the mind and the brain then? is thsi just a matter of language and its many problems?
Friedrich Nietzsche, in his seminal piece, On the Genealogy of Morals: A polemical Tract, proclaimed that Knowledge needs many eyes. In our quest for the elusive concepts of Knowledge and Truth, we will need many eyes. To be exact, 90 pairs of eyes. This blog will provide you with a forum outside the four walls of the classroom to share, comment, critique, and engage critically with the TOK course.
Which TOK aims do you think the course has addressed well so far?
Blog Archive
Labels
- arts (13)
- reason (10)
- human sciences (9)
- essays (8)
- ethics (8)
- mathematics (8)
- TOK aims (6)
- belief (6)
- language (6)
- truth (6)
- ways of knowing (6)
- knowledge (5)
- natural sciences (5)
- sense perception (5)
- TOK WEEKEND (4)
- assessment criteria (4)
- areas of knowledge (3)
- emotion (3)
- explanation (3)
- history (3)
- mind (3)
- presentations (3)
- question of the week (3)
- BLOG IMPROVEMENT (2)
- culture (2)
- invention (2)
- justification (2)
- referencing (2)
- religion (2)
- technology (2)
- IB (1)
- Let's comment on this (1)
- academic honesty (1)
- atheism (1)
- beauty (1)
- causation (1)
- certainty (1)
- confirmation bias (1)
- democracy (1)
- discovery (1)
- ideas (1)
- imagination (1)
- innovation (1)
- intellectual property (1)
- intentionality (1)
- judgement (1)
- knower's perspective (1)
- knowledge issues (1)
- law (1)
- laws of thought (1)
- linguistic determinism (1)
- originality (1)
- prediction (1)
- progress (1)
- reactivity (1)
- real life situations (1)
- right (1)
- scenario (1)
- stereotypes (1)
- truth tests (1)
- values (1)
- wrong (1)
Subscribe To tokathgic.blogspot.com
Comments
Comments
Contributors
- *Dutty winer*
- *FRANTIC*STRIVER*^_^v
- 14ir
- Amanda
- Anna
- Aoise Minjiba
- BBuddha
- BINYAM NEGASH
- Chilot Berassa
- Chris
- Chuchu
- Da Peace
- Dirac "Elridge"
- DnumberoneG
- Exemplary Figure
- Femi
- Fowah
- GET IB
- GIFT M
- Gameli
- Gossip Girl!...shhhh
- Henry Amo Mensah
- Hot Ice
- Jay Kay
- Julian H. Kitching
- K B
- KAMENYA
- Kinkerizer
- LJwella
- Lena Korsah
- Meanie
- Melkamu Tesfaye
- Michael Oduro
- MichaelOsa
- Mr. Bediako
- N.A.
- Puppy
- Rebecca Amenu
- Ricky
- S. Kidane
- Sampomaa
- Sharon
- T
- Teferi
- ThePrez
- Toushiro Hitsugaya
- Unknown
- Vladimir40041756
- YAMAMOTO
- aki
- atmart
- brijette
- chocol8 ch!p
- chopadem
- chopwatyahurd
- cydrina
- dozy
- hMensa
- henok tesfahunegn
- johnbosco
- k'kwor
- kamau_j
- kiztok
- kweku
- maaseku
- mak
- mariama
- mercedez bombardi ma benz
- micheal djan
- mizz r!
- okwase
- pepper
- qpwoeiruty
- runako
- s*N*o*W*y*
- shadrack mensah
- twumwaa
- willie-j
- xOxO
- ~
6 comments:
The French philosopher Rene Descartes thought the connection was the pineal gland. He was wrong, wasn't he? It actually produces melatonin, which regulates your sleep habits.
How can you point to a connection between something that is material (the brain) and something that isn't (the "soul", or intellect)? Can you point to anything that isn't material?
On what basis do you believe that the brain and the mind are not the same thing? Can there be evidence for this? If so, what evidence? If not, on what basis is the belief sustained?
The mind from what I gather from many sources is immaterial, the brain is and so they could not possibly be the same thing.
I believe an immaterial thing and a material thing must be connected by something which we have not yet discovered-something more immaterial i guess(is that possible?)
I tried looking around for 'enlightenment' but I really dont feel any smarter or enlightened:
http://www.ukapologetics.net/07/mindandbody.htm
I thinkn Im actually more confused
It has been suggested that mental events are a kind of "epiphenomenon" of the physical events in the brain - a kind of secondary effect produced by the primary effect. In other words, physical things that happen in the brain give rise somehow to mental events in the mind in a sort of one-way flow. Maybe this is a bit like the relationship of smoke to fire... This approach could be construed as an attempt to keep the brain and mind as separate entities.
But this is all a bit too theoretical, I think. In my opinion, the TOK in this topic revolves around the questions in my previous mail...
Steven Pinker said the mind is what the brain does. The brain is the physical organ and the mind is an attribute (the workings) of that organ. Of course I don't think we have such distinctions in the other organs of the human body. The reason we have it in this case is because the mind has self awareness. Or, is it the brain that developed self awareness which we call the mind? The more important question, however, is how a physical organ came to attain self consciousness. The answers so far are far from conclusive and this takes us back to a thread Mr. Kitching’s posted about a week ago.
This is very interesting. I am wondering if the english word 'mind' is appropriate in this context. I believe the key word should be 'consciousness'. In other words, the brain gives rise to 'consciousness' or self awareness. In this way, I guess the link could be clear.
Post a Comment